pvxfandomcom-20200214-history
PvXwiki:Admin noticeboard/Resolved Build-Specific Issues/Archive 5
__TOC__ Voters don't understand the purpose of the build, nor are their assumptions correct. — Skakid9090 17:18, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :Removed. - Krowman 18:47, 29 September 2007 (CEST) Request removal of Skakid's vote, no real reason given. The Paintballer (T/ ) 17:37, 29 September 2007 (CEST) Request removal of PaintballerOWNZ's vote, no real reason given. — Skakid9090 17:38, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :Lol, I gave a fine reason, and you gave no reason at all. The Paintballer (T/ ) 17:41, 29 September 2007 (CEST) ::Mine's fine as well, shitty builds deserve 0-0-0. — Skakid9090 17:42, 29 September 2007 (CEST) Better? — Skakid9090 17:44, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :Yep =D The Paintballer (T/ ) 17:48, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :Really fixed. - Krowman 18:47, 29 September 2007 (CEST) ::Though I would point out the following: :::Lord Belar ::::Removed: :::::Wanders just don't work well. A bow or a spear is far more effective than this, and this is only moderately effective in ra. :::::Its also been tried many times before in various forms, and unless I missed an update, wands still suck for DPS. ::::Reason: Does more DPS than frenzying warrior with 16 weapon mastery. ::::Removed by: Edru viransu ::Immediately followed by: :::PaintballerOWNZ ::::Removed: :::::Very nice wand build =D. Good DPS. There have been ones made before, but none as effective as th ::::Reason: It`s still a wand build. :::Removed by: Krowman ::I sense inconsistency. -- Wizardboy777(T/ ) 21:37, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :::It's a wander, stop bitching about it. — Skakid9090 21:47, 29 September 2007 (CEST) ::Wands may be good in World of Warcraft, but this isn't World of Warcraft. [[User:Mgrinshpon|'—ǥrɩɳsɧ']][[User talk:Mgrinshpon|'ƿoɲ']] 22:22, 29 September 2007 (CEST) ::If it is a good build, let it stay! I mean, seriously, if you don't like spears, you can't just remove all good votes on paragons saying "spears r sux" The Paintballer (T/ ) 22:25, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :::I like wands-- if you're using them to cast spells, not attack. Wands aren't intended for attacking, they have the same attack speed as hammers, and deal far less damage. You can't even use attack skills (except deft strike) with them. There isn't a wand wrapping of sundering for a reason. Lord Belar 22:44, 29 September 2007 (CEST) ::::Again, that's like saying "spearz are not ment to cast spells, they ar ment 2 attax with" yet monks hold them. The Paintballer (T/ ) 04:18, 30 September 2007 (CEST) :::::Stop making stupid comments. — Skakid9090 04:19, 30 September 2007 (CEST) ::::::Monks don't use them to attack (Do you often see a Mo/P to accomodate extra points in Spear Mastery? No.). They use them for the +5e/+30hp bonuses, beacuse wands can't provide the same, unconditional bonuses. It has nothing to do with damage. Besides, Edru & I are different people, we can't think exactly alike. There is no spear/wand bias here, it is a matter of fact that spears and other martial weapons are better than wands. - Krowman 08:36, 30 September 2007 (CEST) :::::::Spears weren't made by ANet to cast spells, and wands were not created to attack. If they serve purposes well that they were not made to do, let em stay! It works, doesn't it? The Paintballer (T/ ) 06:04, 1 October 2007 (CEST) :(reset indent) No, it doesn't, or the build wouldn't be going through all this. DPS doesn't make a good build. If it were a good build, I could certainly see letting it stay, but it's not. This is one of those times when we admins need to pull out arbitrary judgment in order to preserve the integrity of the wiki. -- Armond Warblade 08:07, 1 October 2007 (CEST) vote by Mrful wants checking plz. PheNaxKian (T/ ) 20:04, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :Dealt with. -- Armond Warblade 20:51, 29 September 2007 (CEST) Drago's vote could use looking at. Lord Belar 22:47, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :Resolved. — Skakid9090 04:21, 30 September 2007 (CEST) LARGE DAMAGE!!!!!! is probably not a good reason for a perfect build. — Skakid9090 23:08, 29 September 2007 (CEST) :Resolved. — Skakid9090 04:21, 30 September 2007 (CEST) It has 1 elite, and 2 non-elite energy management skills. — Skakid9090 00:16, 30 September 2007 (CEST) :Resolved. — Skakid9090 04:21, 30 September 2007 (CEST) Pre SoLS & 2nd soul reaping change votes mention non-existant energy problems. — Skakid9090 20:16, 30 September 2007 (CEST) :Which ones? -- Armond Warblade 16:56, 1 October 2007 (CEST) erm... — Skakid9090 20:27, 30 September 2007 (CEST) :its a build that needs to get "welled" into obliviion and i do think hes sockpuppeting it. *vote needs to get removed *check for sock puppeteering *slap the well tag on it :thats what i think needs to get done, since skakid was a bit vague with his description. Alpha fireborn 20:41, 30 September 2007 (CEST) ::Just a bit ^_^. — Skakid9090 20:42, 30 September 2007 (CEST) *Author Vote Tomoko 09:06, 1 October 2007 (CEST) :Are we removing these now? -- Armond Warblade 16:56, 1 October 2007 (CEST) ::Well if someone rates his build 5-5-5 or little lower to increases the score for it's build, thats not real voting. Tomoko 19:52, 1 October 2007 (CEST) :::Yes, but for one, we haven't come to an official consensus on this topic, and for another, the build may well deserve a 5-5-5. (I haven't looked, I don't know.) -- Armond Warblade 21:16, 1 October 2007 (CEST) *I'd request removal of my vote since I didn't know authors can't vote when I voted on it. *I'd also request removal of Xistded one's vote due to lack of comprehension of game and voting mechanics and no real reason given. I mean he says it has no use in AB then gives it a 4 in universality, also gives a 2 in innovation when the average vote the build got was quite high due to the quite uncommon concept it is based on.Also gives a trash score when the build isn't clearly trashable. Last, I reported him socking once and he may be holding some kind of grudge or something, who knows. (I am assuming good faith anyway, but I think I figured out the guy) thanks. --Morten 13:58, 1 October 2007 (CEST) :I removed mine by myself(lol sry for the newbish request). still, I'd ask for the removal of the other one. --Morten 14:02, 1 October 2007 (CEST) ::Resolved. -- Armond Warblade 16:56, 1 October 2007 (CEST)